However we look at it, May 19, 2004, is a day of disgrace to Hong Kong. The "democrats", having shrugged off repeated criticism from the public and wrangled with the Legislative Council (LegCo) president three times, finally tabled yesterday the controversial motion against the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress (NPCSC). The motion was to express regrets over the NPCSC ruling out universal suffrage in the 2007/08 elections, thereby pitching the SAR legislature against the supreme state organ of power.

In what could be seen as an obvious political show, many "pro-democracy" legislators criticized the NPCSC in bitter terms.

In fact, the "democrats" knew very well that the motion could not possibly get past LegCo; and even if it were able to do so, it would not be legally binding. Then why did they persist? To put it simply, they were aiming at the September LegCo election.

We should not forget what political issues the "democrats" have relied on to gain power. As the majority party in the legislature after reunification, the Democratic Party has never been able to come up with any feasible proposals for Hong Kong's economic development. They have interpreted the role of watchdog of government's rule as opposing all initiatives of Tung Chee-hwa and his administration. They have established the reputation of "all destructive and nothing constructive".

Before the demonstration on July 1 last year, the party and the "pro-democracy" camp it headed were losing public recognition and hence popularity. The July 1 march saved them. People vented their disenchantment caused by economic stagnation and their discontent with the government, hoping that the administration could improve its governance. The "democrats" made good use of these grievances and appointed themselves to be "opinion leaders".

They put forward the demand for universal suffrage in 2007/08, which was also incorporated into their political platform. They are now all set for the September polls.

However, their abandoning of Basic Law principles have led to jitters in society and alarmed the central government, who subsequently made the interpretation of the Basic Law and the ruling on the chief executive's decision on Hong Kong's constitutional development.

The NPCSC ruling has dealt a serious blow to the radical "democrats" who were bursting with confidence at that time. They have been thrown into an impasse - insisting on double universal suffrage means confrontation with the central government and "declaration of war" on the NPC; and giving up the target will deprive them of the opportunity to fish in troubled waters and wreak havoc to seize power.

It can now be seen that they have chosen the path of confrontation, determined to challenge Beijing with election ballots as the stake. They are hoping that the effect of the July 1 mass rally will re-emerge to help them seize control of the LegCo. When that happens, they will be able to bargain with the SAR and central governments.

However, the "democrats" are doomed to lose the gamble no matter whether they are able to take more than half of the LegCo seats. Fighting with the central government will most probably result in a constitutional crisis in Hong Kong and plunge society into chaos. Disgruntled voters will ultimately show the "democrats" the way out of the political scene.

In yesterday's LegCo debate, we could all see how the motion was voted down. What we could not see was the serious harm being done to the image of the legislature as well as Beijing's deepening distrust of the LegCo's rules of procedure.

(China Daily HK Edition May 20, 2004)